Moving 46605

Thomas Hobbes

There is something I’ve been thinking about. At my board and care there is almost sixty people. We share common areas; such as Dinning, Medication, T.V., and Patio. There are lots of opportunities to interact and socialize. We do have a person here with Hepatitis C. And we also have a couple of people with Diabetes. I have been looking for an authority on this subject, because I have a developing opinion that there may be an interaction of some kind; namely Creativity. I will be reading the Philosophy of Thomas Hobbes in his Book, Leviathan. ed. JCA Gaskin. Oxford, 1998.

Since I have directly said what I will be reading for, I think it is only fair to reassure the reader that I have had a comprehensive blood test on February 4, 2008. My Hepatitis Panel was NON-REACTIVE; the Glucose was 91 in range (65-99 mg/dL). There are other details, but I just wanted to mention that I probably have not contracted any blood diseases in this past year. If you are an employee of McDonalds Corporation, I sincerely believe that this kind of blood testing is periodically necessary as part of the job. Remember that we have come a long way since 1651.

Follicle

From Arles, Vincent van Gogh wrote to his brother Theo: “I am seeing a lot of new things here. I am learning, and my body, if treated with a little kindness, serves me well.”

Theo was probably expected to have some knowledge. As an artist, Vincent toiled amongst his paintings. Elaborate charges against Vincent are all that is expected from Theo. And so…

The basic assumption is that a difficult Question has been asked.
You are struggling with one of the most important of humanities. Unfortunately nowhere in Philosophy or Religion can this be learned since there is no place willing or accommodating. If someone failed to convince you they know what you are asking, would you impose on them your answer? I should not have commented, or else I must forgive a person whose transgressions have advanced and whose answer is possible. This is not my discussion because I have not asked the questions. After careful meditation, I have concluded, particularly, that there is some solution a Prior to this possibility.

Then should we thus maintain those whose transgressions must be forgiven as the rank-n-file for an answer, or should we have them as steady but nourishing components of the way?

Vincent van Gogh
Arles, June 1888
Oil on Canvas, 73 x 92.5 cm
F 425, JH 1442
Otterlo, Rijksmuseum Kroller-Muller.

Image Citation:
Walther, Ingo, and Rainer Metzger. Vincent van Gogh: The Complete Paintings, Volume II. Trans. Michael Hulse. Oldenburg, Germany: Benedikt Taschen, 1990.

Coffee Area

Make Me A Picture!

A girl has this as the first directive for a guy. It’s the Age old question. There are a number of responses to this kind of a “Fire-Wall.” ART is the closest and best answer, but there are as many developments to this first directive as there are relationships. Continue reading “Make Me A Picture!” →

About Me

This post is, by way of introduction, about me. I am Hugh Farrell. Prior to 2003 my given name is JEFFREY DEVITT. So, if you are looking for me, read this first. I will explain a little bit about myself. I attended Thousand Oaks High School, and I live in my home county of Ventura in the City of Oxnard. I entered the Mental Health system in 1993 when I was told to stop returning to my childhood home. I eventually stopped returning to my childhood home when in December of 2006 an inappropriately buried baby girl with Down-syndrome was discovered. Without the “problem” for me as an advocate of the baby, and the obvious problem the mental Health people might have had, I did eventually stop returning there. I guess now I live in Oxnard. With my knowledge about this kind of problem, I should be returning to Oxnard until after a time I will probably have to stop another return here as well. I would sure like to figure out where to go next. Since I am getting quite good at this returning business, I am obviously open for ideas as to the next place to go where I might apply the remedy similarly as in the case of my childhood home. Okay? Hugh.

There are reasons for the Mental Health affiliation. The most obvious reason for it is that I have a Diagnosis: Schizo-affective Disorder. This is the one that makes sense. The other one which is devastating is Schizophrenia. The most notable historical person who had Schizophrenia was Paul Cezanne. I know a lot about Mental Illness. In fact almost everything I have done on the Internet is devoted to understanding Mental Illness. Would you like to know more about me? Would you like to know more about Mental Illness?

So, this is my introduction. By the way, I am that sort of person who has been extremely successful in Mental Health. As sure as any major success stories include a huge amount of resources I am no exception. I have made my career in Mental Health. If you have ever had any Mental Health experience, you would recognize my type of person. I have nothing to be ashamed about. I am literally working at the area of my talent. I am proud of my achievements though they are largely a mystery.

Thank you for your interest. Hugh.

Comments to XVR

There is some question as to just what is the XVR page. Some visitors are wondering about the situation. I read the page today and I think that there is a lot of evidence presented, and that the reader is expected to make an integral. So, let us take a survey of the situation.

First, the distinguishing definition that prefaces the comparison of Sartre and Ponty could also refer to one of the governing rights, though on it’s way out, a Creed. That issue is coming to a realization by both global warming and government complications. Keep in mind that though it seems like I have spelled things out, that it is really a difficult exercise to realize that Hume has his value in support for people who would be recessively oriented rather than dominant in nature. That should be a Huzza for Hume!!

Okay, now that the genetic issue is being discussed, I bring to the discussion differentiation of Sartre and Ponty. And, from that passage in XVR the intended message is that Ponty’s little engine “see” is designed to see only those indiscernible objects which will never fully come into being. Familiar? Yes. Ponty was developing for only the most treasured events of Phenomenology. At the time of writing XVR I realized that Ponty was not clear about what relative “see” it is that was supposed to satisfy his engine. I reasoned, thankfully that see would not hurt me, the genetic issue made most sense when I imagined he was referring to the twenty-third chromosome; inheritance of Sexual orientation; XY. So the reader has to read for the distinction of the Sartre and Ponty discussion. And most notably that Ponty may have been attracted to another gene on the basis that it was controversial; the twenty-second chromosome. A tall order for a philosopher whose best work is less than fifty pages.

From another direction, Sartre was a major person in the self actualization for people to sort of understand their seeing character. I am really not very well learned about Sartre’s philosophy. I do know that he must have been very patient with Ponty and served in the clutch for most of the time. He refused his award. I am sure he will eventually resolve his need to get that interesting psychology term for the seeing person involved in the Ponty circumstance. Recall that Ponty was writing about Paul Cezanne. And since the situation was that of the naturally recessing genetic disposition, Sartre remains naturally curious. Is it a “Pay Stub?”

The question remains in the XVR page how does any of this relate to the X or the R when the passage doesn’t ever mention the basic facts that are predicating the philosophers. I hope at the outside there is a suspicion that XVR is a correct title by intuition alone. I am not going to worry about it. I feel that there is enough said without having doubt about the way in which a decision such as XVR is decided.

Venturi 145

venturi_145_469×565.jpg

Paul Cezanne

Venturi 145

Phenomenology

I am going to discuss my personal views about someone who is very important to me; Merleau-Ponty. From my first recollection, I did not like Ponty. The fact is those feelings guaranteed me an automatic ‘F’. I can tell that I have made progress in my opinion since – as evidence by my erasure of comments in the margins of his greatest work: Eye and Mind.

So I cleaned up my copy of his essay. Merleau-Ponty who was a French Philosopher wrote about the Master French painter Cezanne. After Ponty passed away in the early sixties, his works were translated into English. The translator, Carleton Dallery used a number of writing styles to achieve an effective and purposeful study for the English speaking scholar to learn about Cezanne. The consequences for my strong feelings against Merleau-Ponty at that first reading are not outside of the realm of possibilities for any reader. It might be the case that Carleton Dallery at the expense of being perceived as not knowing a certain detail about Cezanne, embedded a critical idea which does not come to fruition in order to affect the reader with strong feelings. Not however, but particularly for Ponty, space has taken on a kind of identity. I have had difficulty overcoming my initial opinion and further hold by some fault of my own I have come up short on wits. Thus I must reason I had at that time the condition about which I have already talked about a necessity for agreement. This is in keeping with my latter readings, and I want to reassure Dick Tracy that I like Maurice Merleau-Ponty and that I understand his essay; I admit it is a great work.

You are a fool! So, you say you like Maurice Merleau-Ponty, but you have changed. Why you don’t convict him for your disposition?

Well, I will tell you, my friend, Maurice Merleau-Ponty’s English translation has as a remedy something called a Rhinoplasty. This is a Plastic Surgery correcting the Septum from deviation. These were his last words, ‘you have your whole life ahead of you.’ I got a Rhinoplasty. It has been the single most enlightening procedure of my Life.

If you are able to sustain a frame of mind on that of a person whose fingers are stubby, you will learn. There are a number of builds that are available to muse with; all of which raises your social status. I am telling you this because there is a reason that a Dominant Gene results in a Conscience. The Dominant Genes of this particular type in a person who has one from each parent, results in a disorder, called Phocomelia, and which causes a birth defect of the arms and hands. Phocomelia literally means Flippers. The genetic disposition, I am calling a Disorder, includes the making of the Conscience where there is only one Dominant Gene of which it is the same type. Here the Idea is that you get your genes from your parents. This is a normal condition to have one, or to have both Recessive. The infamous Luke Sky-walker was Recessive-Recessive; “Use the Force Luke”. And this very issue which sadly Maurice Merleau-Ponty did not correctly develop for some reason, is a Distinguishing component of socialization.

When the Philosopher says existentially NO!; it is to be a distinguishing threshold in which we enlightened the path to Fame. For example you would not want a person with a conscience to read the news or write lyrics for an album unless the person were able to overcome the present with new material. What you have said about my acceptance of Maurice Merleau-Ponty is probably a thought disorder.

To make this situation which I have built in thought whole, I just want to mention that there is another reading of David Hume. His thoughts mostly have been about the good of determination. But if you needed an advocate for your applied distinguishing activity, which I have said is Genetic, Hume has the correct thinking for a free minded person of a general nature to be an advocate. So, on the basis that this issue is Genetic, I conclude that there will be NO changes in the thinking process – no fear. I say this and I expect you to believe that you are who you are ever since conception. Now, haven’t I been a nuisance, a person should not have Fear? And haven’t I just given you a good reason to teach Hume even though his works only seem to fit with a certain type of a person?

If for some reason, the little friendship that Maurice Merleau-Ponty and Jean-Paul Sartre had while the editors of the magazine in France the prejudice against Maurice Merleau-Ponty still went without address, his reason is there really is something to see: and I am referring to Phenomenology. Maurice Merleau-Ponty would have been the president of that little organization of Cosmonauts.

Now, I have a little bit of house keeping to do for Maurice Merleau-Ponty that I haven’t addressed elsewhere. While Maurice Merleau-Ponty had a driver which never came to fruition. I have mentioned it earlier, there is a confusion about which gene he is referring to. Let me say that when I was referring to a Dominant Gene, it is conceivable the inherited dominant gene for conscience could have come from either parent and not just the Father. Though he did not speak of it, he was all the while referring to another Gene; it was a driver to get a person to have strong feelings. In the Philosophical work Eye and Mind, which he is best known for and which he sort of built a little engine “see,” Maurice Merleau-Ponty, though I do not believe it today, there is a tendency to confuse the gene for sex with the gene for conscience. Recall that Maurice Merleau-Ponty mostly ignored the prompting from Sartre about the Genetic issue. So, when the prejudicial perspective that Sartre would have prompted him about in their years together came up, Maurice Merleau-Ponty probably extended his most highest held belief, to see, in the instance that it is restricted to that of the spirit of the Father. In the case of the Fathers Gene, the Genetic issue is in regards to the twenty-third Chromosome determining a person’s sex. In a remedy, from the religious point of view involving the Holy Trinity, after thoughts (God willing), the Father could have a high degree of influence over his children’s cognitive abilities. Here I want to mention that this is as much a disparity as that of the twenty-second Chromosome which determines conscience. So, even though I have been square about a Distinguishing social issue, the presiding gene, I have had to bring into the discussion a matter of articulation of Maurice Merleau-Pontys emphasis as having a gene that could inconceivably been inherited from the Mother as well as from the Father. It is the Holy Trinity case the Philosopher Spinoza had as a good Catholic. Maurice Merleau-Ponty merely cast into time for a collection of intelligent substance with which seeing would be the basis of a Phenomenology without the context involving the gene for sexual orientation.

I seem to have uncovered a matter of confusion. If you wish to think about this issue look at XVR and Comments to XVR